http://dinosaurs.about.com/od/ dinosaurbasics/a/pterodactyl-f acts.htm10. Neither Pteranodon nor Pterodactylus had feathers.Despite what many people think, modern birds didn't descend from pterosaurs like Pterodactylus and Pteranodon, but from two-legged, carnivorous dinosaurs, many of which were covered with feathers. As far as we know, pterosaurs were strictly reptilian in appearance, though it's conceivable that some odd species had feathers as well.{Now this is just...no wonder people are confused...birds didn't evolve from the FLYING pteranodon but from land animals...that makes a whole heap of sense...as in NOT...}

I'm sorry that you don't understand the details behind the evolution of birds. That's largely because your religion precludes you from studying science. It's not too late for you to change that - you can still have faith in your deity while studying basic science. It won't make you an atheist or hurt your religion, unless your religion is wedded to the very silly idea of young earth creationism.

In that case, there's probably no amount of rationality and evidence based argument that can alter your position.

<quoted text>Uhm...I'm pretty sure everyone knows that birds evolved from dinos and not pterosaurs now. That's pretty old news now.I'm sorry that you don't understand the details behind the evolution of birds. That's largely because your religion precludes you from studying science. It's not too late for you to change that - you can still have faith in your deity while studying basic science. It won't make you an atheist or hurt your religion, unless your religion is wedded to the very silly idea of young earth creationism.In that case, there's probably no amount of rationality and evidence based argument that can alter your position.

http://dinosaurs.about.com/od/ dinosaurbasics/a/pterodactyl-f acts.htm10. Neither Pteranodon nor Pterodactylus had feathers.Despite what many people think, modern birds didn't descend from pterosaurs like Pterodactylus and Pteranodon, but from two-legged, carnivorous dinosaurs, many of which were covered with feathers. As far as we know, pterosaurs were strictly reptilian in appearance, though it's conceivable that some odd species had feathers as well.{Now this is just...no wonder people are confused...birds didn't evolve from the FLYING pteranodon but from land animals...that makes a whole heap of sense...as in NOT...}

Would it make more sense if bats came from pteranodons or pterodactyls, and not rodents?

<quoted text>True. I may be as stubborn as the wizards in UU.Ook-ook...

There's nothing wrong with clearly stating you have a faith based belief system.

Imo, "wrong" happens when people make authoritative statements without actually being authorities. For example, I am quite unqualified to tell you what Biblical passages mean what, or which NT passages reference which OT passages. Likewise, creationists - at least all the ones I have ever come across - don't have a working understanding of the sciences involved in evolution, yet make authoritative statements anyways.

It's equally dishonest for me to make claims about Biblical interpretation as it is for a creationist to tell me how evolution works. Both of us, in the above examples, simply don't have a foundation to build an argument on.

<quoted text>There's nothing wrong with clearly stating you have a faith based belief system.Imo, "wrong" happens when people make authoritative statements without actually being authorities. For example, I am quite unqualified to tell you what Biblical passages mean what, or which NT passages reference which OT passages. Likewise, creationists - at least all the ones I have ever come across - don't have a working understanding of the sciences involved in evolution, yet make authoritative statements anyways.It's equally dishonest for me to make claims about Biblical interpretation as it is for a creationist to tell me how evolution works. Both of us, in the above examples, simply don't have a foundation to build an argument on.

True enough, I actually agree with you. That's what I put up is somewhat tongue-in-cheek humor. I mean yes...I do believe the Bible, creation...salvation in Jesus Christ...God Creator/Father...but I am in no way an authority in science.

Well, maybe in knowing that evolution is shown to be true because of the existence of vampires, werewolves and zombies.

http://dinosaurs.about.com/od/ dinosaurbasics/a/pterodactyl-f acts.htm10. Neither Pteranodon nor Pterodactylus had feathers.Despite what many people think, modern birds didn't descend from pterosaurs like Pterodactylus and Pteranodon, but from two-legged, carnivorous dinosaurs, many of which were covered with feathers. As far as we know, pterosaurs were strictly reptilian in appearance, though it's conceivable that some odd species had feathers as well.{Now this is just...no wonder people are confused...birds didn't evolve from the FLYING pteranodon but from land animals...that makes a whole heap of sense...as in NOT...}

Well, at first glance it doesn't. But the evidence points to it!

Firstly, birds and pterosaurs are vastly dissimilar. Anatomically, all similarity they have is that they have wings. They have different skeletal structures. They have different wing designs. Pterosaurs lacked feathers. Birds have raptorial claws and tailfeathers. Pterosaurs' wings were made from leather.

The true ancestor of birds are small therapod dinosaurs - that is two legged dinosaurs.(If you have ever watched "The Lost World", you would have seen those little green buggers, called Compsognathus. Picture one of those with feathers)The first 'transitional link' we can make from therapod dinosaurs to birds, was Archeopteryx, 135 million years ago. Therapods and birds have a great many things in common:1) Hollow bones. Birds use it for flight. Therapods used it for agility (Like Velociraptor and Deinonychus)2) Feathers. Yes - dinosaurs had feathers too.3) Raptorial claws. Go to a museum. Look at the claws of an eagle, and the claws of a therapod (specifically a raptor, like Deinonychus). You will see very similar claws, except for one. The therapods would have kept one toe up, a "killing claw", while keeping it sharp. Modern birds of prey (also called raptors) have no need to keep any toes up, because they do not wear their toes out by travelling long distances across land.4) Hard shelled eggs. 5) Skeletal structures. The hips, neck and torso are such a close fit, it is uncanny. Go to a museum and examine.

Also - birds have deactivated genes in their mouths for teeth, during embryonic stage! As well as elongated tail vertebrae.Lastly, and most comprehensively, dinosaur DNA reveal a great similarity with birds.

<quoted text>Well, at first glance it doesn't. But the evidence points to it!Firstly, birds and pterosaurs are vastly dissimilar. Anatomically, all similarity they have is that they have wings. They have different skeletal structures. They have different wing designs. Pterosaurs lacked feathers. Birds have raptorial claws and tailfeathers. Pterosaurs' wings were made from leather.The true ancestor of birds are small therapod dinosaurs - that is two legged dinosaurs.(If you have ever watched "The Lost World", you would have seen those little green buggers, called Compsognathus. Picture one of those with feathers)The first 'transitional link' we can make from therapod dinosaurs to birds, was Archeopteryx, 135 million years ago. Therapods and birds have a great many things in common:1) Hollow bones. Birds use it for flight. Therapods used it for agility (Like Velociraptor and Deinonychus)2) Feathers. Yes - dinosaurs had feathers too.3) Raptorial claws. Go to a museum. Look at the claws of an eagle, and the claws of a therapod (specifically a raptor, like Deinonychus). You will see very similar claws, except for one. The therapods would have kept one toe up, a "killing claw", while keeping it sharp. Modern birds of prey (also called raptors) have no need to keep any toes up, because they do not wear their toes out by travelling long distances across land.4) Hard shelled eggs.5) Skeletal structures. The hips, neck and torso are such a close fit, it is uncanny. Go to a museum and examine.Also - birds have deactivated genes in their mouths for teeth, during embryonic stage! As well as elongated tail vertebrae.Lastly, and most comprehensively, dinosaur DNA reveal a great similarity with birds.Yes, it stumped us. But the facts point to it.

Okay, I'm thinking here...lets say there God exists...He designed the animals. The connection between birds and dinosaurs would actually make sense. You would need similar bone structure, skeletal structure well, to fly for one...and with dinosaurs if they had a denser skeletal structure they would be too heavy for their size.

<quoted text>Interesting that you picked the donkey out of this. When talking about Jesus since He is God as well He would know all the prophecies wouldn't He?The prophecies...which is nothing more than God autenticating who He is by telling us what is going to happen because He knows the beginning from the ending already.So your example is a bit misdirected.

You are making a number of EXTREME assumptions here and what's worse, they are circular.

You are saying that because Jesus is God therefore the prophecies are valid because they confirm that he is God. That's circular. If your assumption (Jesus is God) is invalid, then the entire statement invalidates itself.

That's not valid reasoning.

If I were to ride a donkey in Israel, would that make me God? No. I would be doing it because I read in the old testament that someone in the future would do it. Now I'm doing it.

That's not the same as me doing something and THEN discovering that it was predicted.

In order for a prophecy to be valid it has to be:a) SPECIFIC & UNUSUALb) FORETOLDc) UNKNOWN or UNCONTROLLABLE by the individuald) UNREPEATABLE

Specific & Unusual:- If I predict that there will be a presidential election in the US sometime in the next 10 years, is that proof that I'm tapping into magic powers? No.- If I predict that someone at some point in the future will ride a donkey (a common animal which is ridden even in other stories in the Bible), is that a prophecy? No. I'm sure there have been a million incidents of people in Israel riding donkeys.

Foretold:- The prophecy has to have been recorded BEFORE the events that it claims to predict unfold.- If I predict that I am going to write the sentence above this one in this post, is that prophecy? No. I'm writing this AFTER I wrote that.

Unknown/Uncontrollable:- If I predict that you will do something which is within your power to do and you know I made this prediction, you can act on what I said without it being an actual prediction.- You would need to either NOT know I made the prediction, or the prediction would have to be something which is entirely out of the control of other people.(ie I predict a volcanic eruption on a specific day and place where no active volcano exists).

Unrepeatable:- Predicting something which happens regularly is not a prediction. Again, with the donkey. How do we know the prediction is referring to Jesus and not one of the million people before or after who have ridden donkeys?

http://dinosaurs.about.com/od/ dinosaurbasics/a/pterodactyl-f acts.htm10. Neither Pteranodon nor Pterodactylus had feathers.Despite what many people think, modern birds didn't descend from pterosaurs like Pterodactylus and Pteranodon, but from two-legged, carnivorous dinosaurs, many of which were covered with feathers. As far as we know, pterosaurs were strictly reptilian in appearance, though it's conceivable that some odd species had feathers as well.{Now this is just...no wonder people are confused...birds didn't evolve from the FLYING pteranodon but from land animals...that makes a whole heap of sense...as in NOT...}

Why would an ostrich have to descend from a flying lizard that looked like a manta ray rather than a dinosaur that had small arms, two long legs and a snaky neck?

You are looking at one feature: "These fly" and drawing assumptions which are not rational and then complaining that the people who are looking at MORE important features are not in agreement with your assessment.

<quoted text>Okay, I'm thinking here...lets say there God exists...He designed the animals. The connection between birds and dinosaurs would actually make sense. You would need similar bone structure, skeletal structure well, to fly for one...and with dinosaurs if they had a denser skeletal structure they would be too heavy for their size.

This is the absolute worst kind of post hoc crap.

First it's "God is real, dinosaurs never existed."Then it's "God is real, dinos existed but didn't evolve into birds. Birds also existed as separate things."Then it's "God is real, dinos did evolve into birds, that's how we know God is real."

There is NO bit of evidence that anyone could present that doesn't fit into the "God is real" category because there are no rules whatsoever to your claims.

If we demonstrate conclusively that humans evolved from earlier non-human primates, then that is "evidence for God" because blah blah blah.

If you demonstrate conclusively that it DIDN'T happen that way, then that is "evidence for God" because blah blah blah.

<quoted text>You are making a number of EXTREME assumptions here and what's worse, they are circular.You are saying that because Jesus is God therefore the prophecies are valid because they confirm that he is God. That's circular. If your assumption (Jesus is God) is invalid, then the entire statement invalidates itself.That's not valid reasoning.If I were to ride a donkey in Israel, would that make me God? No. I would be doing it because I read in the old testament that someone in the future would do it. Now I'm doing it.That's not the same as me doing something and THEN discovering that it was predicted.In order for a prophecy to be valid it has to be:a) SPECIFIC & UNUSUALb) FORETOLDc) UNKNOWN or UNCONTROLLABLE by the individuald) UNREPEATABLESpecific & Unusual:- If I predict that there will be a presidential election in the US sometime in the next 10 years, is that proof that I'm tapping into magic powers? No.- If I predict that someone at some point in the future will ride a donkey (a common animal which is ridden even in other stories in the Bible), is that a prophecy? No. I'm sure there have been a million incidents of people in Israel riding donkeys.Foretold:- The prophecy has to have been recorded BEFORE the events that it claims to predict unfold.- If I predict that I am going to write the sentence above this one in this post, is that prophecy? No. I'm writing this AFTER I wrote that.Unknown/Uncontrollable:- If I predict that you will do something which is within your power to do and you know I made this prediction, you can act on what I said without it being an actual prediction.- You would need to either NOT know I made the prediction, or the prediction would have to be something which is entirely out of the control of other people.(ie I predict a volcanic eruption on a specific day and place where no active volcano exists).Unrepeatable:- Predicting something which happens regularly is not a prediction. Again, with the donkey. How do we know the prediction is referring to Jesus and not one of the million people before or after who have ridden donkeys?

You are still misinterpreting...

The Birth of Jesus

Prophecy: Jesus to be born in BethlehemOld Testament Reference: Micah 5:2New Testament Fulfillment: Luke 2:4-7 "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of you shall come forth to Me the One to be Ruler in Israel, whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting. " (Micah 5:2)

"Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be registered with Mary, his betrothed wife, who was with child. So it was, that while they were there, the days were completed for her to be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn. " (Luke 2:4-7)

<quoted text>This is the absolute worst kind of post hoc crap.First it's "God is real, dinosaurs never existed."Then it's "God is real, dinos existed but didn't evolve into birds. Birds also existed as separate things."Then it's "God is real, dinos did evolve into birds, that's how we know God is real."There is NO bit of evidence that anyone could present that doesn't fit into the "God is real" category because there are no rules whatsoever to your claims.If we demonstrate conclusively that humans evolved from earlier non-human primates, then that is "evidence for God" because blah blah blah.If you demonstrate conclusively that it DIDN'T happen that way, then that is "evidence for God" because blah blah blah.If EVERYTHING is evidence, then NOTHING is evidence.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.